Yes, the projective plane is isomorphic to (as in, the geometry is equivalent, not just that they are in bijection) its dual. The isomorphism is not canonical, but rather depends on a choice of coordinates. One isomorphism is the one you describe: to the line $\{(x:y:z) | ax + by + cz = 0\}$ associate the point $(a:b:c)$, and conversely to the point $(x:y:z)$ associate the line $\{(a:b:c) | xa + yb + zc = 0\}$.
You may think of the projective plane as consisting of all lines through the origin in $\mathbb R^3$. Then the lines correspond to planes through the origin. The identification above corresponds to identifying a line in $\mathbb R^3$ with the orthogonal plane. Or you may think of $\mathbb R\mathbb P^2$ as the round 2-dimensional sphere with antipodal points identified, so that lines are great circles. Then the identification with the dual corresponds to identifying a great circle (say, the "equator") with its "centers" (the north and south poles).
If you prefer to think in terms of linear algebra (say because you want to work over an arbitrary field, rather than $\mathbb R$), then an identification between $\mathbb P^2$ and its dual is the same as an identification between 3-dimensional vector space $V$ and its (linear) dual $V^\vee$. The identification above corresponds to choosing a basis, and identifying it with its dual basis. In terms of bases, a good notation is to write vectors in $V$ as columns, and vectors in $V^\vee$ as rows. (Then the evaluation of a dual vector on a vector is just matrix multiplication.) The identification above is just taking the transpose of a column vector to get a row vector.
All descriptions illustrate that the identification is not preserved by arbitrary projective transformations. It breaks the symmetry group from $\mathrm{PGL}(3)$ down to $\mathrm{SO}(3)$.